LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Cultural appropriation springs to mind
Happy No Collusion Day Everyone
- Thread starter Hotdog
- Start date
I’ve only skimmed the last few pages and can’t keep up with everything here, but wanted to go ahead and post this here to have it time stamped and figured this was as good a place as any:
I believe Trump in 2020 presents a legitimate narrative challenge to his opposition. Russia has been the default to fall back on for rationalizing what was perceived to be an impossible win. The self-reflection of realizing that they got some (many) things very, very wrong, and being able to interject a variable like Russia proves more palatable, yet blinds from conscious awareness issues that remain unaddressed.
What I believe this “exoneration” will facilitate is a new narrative, which is essentially a continuation of the old narrative, in the event of a Trump win in 2020. Post hoc analysis will point to a “premature” exoneration (Mueller) that dropped America’s guard on the existential threat of Russian interference, which facilitated an unfettered Russian campaign of misinformation that propels a 2020 Trump victory. That’s the narrative to watch for that will be easier to swallow than “we ****ed this thing up again — hard — after doubling down on what got us into this mess.”
I believe Trump in 2020 presents a legitimate narrative challenge to his opposition. Russia has been the default to fall back on for rationalizing what was perceived to be an impossible win. The self-reflection of realizing that they got some (many) things very, very wrong, and being able to interject a variable like Russia proves more palatable, yet blinds from conscious awareness issues that remain unaddressed.
What I believe this “exoneration” will facilitate is a new narrative, which is essentially a continuation of the old narrative, in the event of a Trump win in 2020. Post hoc analysis will point to a “premature” exoneration (Mueller) that dropped America’s guard on the existential threat of Russian interference, which facilitated an unfettered Russian campaign of misinformation that propels a 2020 Trump victory. That’s the narrative to watch for that will be easier to swallow than “we ****ed this thing up again — hard — after doubling down on what got us into this mess.”
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the links. Interesting that they didn't utilize photographic evidence from the Bush years to lambaste him. And your right that I wasn't bringing up children in cages during the Obama years. Just as in the Trump years, I recognize that border security is being put into an impossible situation. I appreciate that they are doing the best that they can, and I am in favor of giving them the additional support that they request.
Is it your position that the pictures misrepresented the situation on the ground in some way? That the pictures they used for Obama were not sufficiently condemnatory? Did they have access for current pictures? Do you think the nature of Trump's rhetoric toward immigrants, compared with Obama's rhetoric, may have colored the coverage?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I think it matters, a lot, that the media told people that the pictures and videos were of "atrocities" that Trump was committing, and that they were actually taken during the Obama era. If you can't figure out why that makes a difference, and you can't understand what is wrong with this sort of reporting, then I guess I can't help you. I bet you would figure out what is wrong with this sort of reporting really quick if the media was handling a story critical of a liberal politician in the same way.
Do we agree that the pictures and videos were representative of the conditions that Trump was overseeing, and that Trump increased the scale? Do we agree that journalists had not been permitted to modern pictures?
I agree that the media should have clearly labeled any such picture with the time it was taken, so as to avoid confusion. If they did not do that, they failed. Otherwise, using dramatic, illustrative pictures is a way to bring in more viewers, readers, etc., adn bump up ad revenues. Don't you believe in capitalism?
They do handle stores of liberal politicians this way. You didn't know?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Go ahead and show me your proof that they accurately labeled the pictures. Go ahead and show me your evidence that they weren't able to take "modern pictures." Go ahead and explain to me why you believe that lying is some sort of foundation or exclusive realm to capitalism. And finally, go ahead and post your links of a liberal politician being handled in this way.
Red
Well-Known Member
These photos are current. About 1% of the entire population of Guatemala and Honduras are expected to be apprehended at the border this fiscal year:
https://www.latimes.com/world/mexic...migrants-el-paso-camp-20190329-htmlstory.html
Some background on the refugee exodus from the Northern Triangle:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/29/us-mexico-border-immigration-chaos
"Violence perpetrated by drug traffickers, street gangs and state security forces have made this region, known as the Northern Triangle, the most dangerous place in the world outside an official war zone."
And the US role in helping to create the crisis in Central America:
https://medium.com/s/story/timeline-us-intervention-central-america-a9bea9ebc148
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qvnyzq/central-america-atrocities-caused-immigration-crisis
https://www.latimes.com/world/mexic...migrants-el-paso-camp-20190329-htmlstory.html
Some background on the refugee exodus from the Northern Triangle:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/29/us-mexico-border-immigration-chaos
"Violence perpetrated by drug traffickers, street gangs and state security forces have made this region, known as the Northern Triangle, the most dangerous place in the world outside an official war zone."
And the US role in helping to create the crisis in Central America:
https://medium.com/s/story/timeline-us-intervention-central-america-a9bea9ebc148
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qvnyzq/central-america-atrocities-caused-immigration-crisis
I think it's unfortunate that you automatically assume I am holding some position without reading my posts. I said, "I agree that the media should have clearly labeled any such picture with the time it was taken, so as to avoid confusion. If they did not do that, they failed." That has a strong implication that I have no reason to think they did such labeling.
I was well aware at the time that journalists were trying, and failing, to get access to record the conditions in the compounds. If you were not, too bad for you. I feel no need to convince you.
If people can get more money by lying, a lot of them will lie. I don't see how that is a "foundation" or "exclusive realm" to capitalism, but it is an expected feature.
Why? What do I get out of it?
Red
Well-Known Member
A google search of "reporters not allowed to take photos of caged children" will yield many articles from the period in question explaining that authorities would not allow photojournalists to take photos inside the detention facilities.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
You get to prove that you're not just making this stuff up.
Based on previous experience, providing such proof will make no difference to you. It won't make any difference in my life, either. I'll go play EuroRails instead.